I’VE MENTIONED BEFORE IN THIS COLUMN that I started my voting life in 1980 (the year I turned 18) as a reliable Republican voter. I voted for Ronald Reagan twice and for Bush the Elder once. I even briefly explored joining the John Birch Society (they were sufficiently loony to dissuade even that long-ago hard-right, Reagan-voting version of me).
My journey away from that has been long and complex. Part of it was seeing the results of 30 years of Reaganist economics on virtually everyone except the very rich. And part was a very vivid sense that racism has become woven into the fabric of Republican political strategy, evidenced by the coded appeals to rural and working class whites’ sense of loss of relative economic status — which is another way of describing the way the old Southern power structure always played poor whites against poor blacks, in order to divide and rule.
Mostly, though, it was my belief that in politics, it is less important what you stand for than who you stand with. When you examine what the GOP does, rather than what it makes pious noise about, it was pretty clear that they stand with the strong rather than the weak; with the rich rather than the poor; for strength too often at the expense of mercy.
I should probably say here that I am describing the GOP’s behavior as an institution. I know plenty of individual Republicans who are fine, upstanding citizens, and who sincerely believe that their preferred political party has the answers for what ails the U.S. My late Aunt Virginia was such a person — she loved Ann Coulter’s books, was a reliable Fox viewer, and in many other ways was an archetypal contemporary conservative. While I disagreed with her politics, I respected that she advocated for them from sincerely held beliefs.
That said, I find that my new home in the Democratic Party has never really been a comfortable one, either.
The Democrats of the present are a long way, in both time and ideology, from the Democrats I would feel most at home with.
The Democratic Party of my dreams would once again stand up for working people and the un- and underemployed. That party said things like this, from FDR’s Second Inaugural Address:
“I see millions of families trying to live on incomes so meager that the pall of family disaster hangs over them day by day.
“I see millions whose daily lives in city and on farm continue under conditions labeled indecent by a so-called polite society half a century ago.
“I see millions denied education, recreation, and the opportunity to better their lot and the lot of their children. …
“I see one-third of a nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished.
“It is not in despair that I paint you that picture. I paint it for you in hope — because the Nation, seeing and understanding the injustice in it, proposes to paint it out. We are determined to make every American citizen the subject of his country’s interest and concern; and we will never regard any faithful law-abiding group within our borders as superfluous. The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.”
I can’t easily imagine any Democratic politician of national consequence making a similar speech today. The reason is that the people who finance the campaigns of both parties would be gravely inconvenienced by any program to correct those injustices. FDR had some choice words for that cadre during his 1936 campaign:
“For nearly four years you have had an Administration which instead of twirling its thumbs has rolled up its sleeves. We will keep our sleeves rolled up.
“We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace — business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.
“They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.
“Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me — and I welcome their hatred. …
“We Americans have a choice to make. We can either reform our economic and political system so that it benefits all citizens rather than a small slice of the elite; or we can surrender our power without a fight, and accept the consequences of that abdication in an economy that lurches between boom and bust, and an oligarchy that has no need to care a whit for the interests of anyone but themselves.”
Matt Talbot is a writer and poet, as well as an old Benicia hand. He works for a tech start-up in San Francisco.
Sharing is caring!
This is the political dilemma in 2015. We are voting for the lesser of two evils instead of for whom we feel will do a better job. I’ve been voting since 1973, and have never checked the box preceding a Republican candidate’s name because of their disdain for the working stiff…keeping Davis-Bacon operating was my big issue. That said though as time went by, I was never comfortable with the ‘liberal’ label for me, and sure as he11 strongly disagree with the unorganized ‘progressive’ grouping as it marches double-time toward the fringe left as fast as the hateful Tea Party hurtles to the fringe right. I’d like to see both fringe groups disappear over the horizon, never to be heard from again.
I want to see Democrats and Republicans return without the label baggage, both with philosophies somewhere within a few thousand miles of the center of the political spectrum that are in reach of compromise. Nothing gets accomplished now because one party resides on Jupiter, and the other on Mercury, each with their backs toward each other.
Remember when there was a good chance the political parties understood the opposition’s reasoning for their stance so it made sense to compromise? Now they draw lines in the sand to just draw lines in the sand…and nothing gets done. Those were the days when politicians fought back their greed long enough to realize when the middle class was prosperous, quality of life went up and communities were healthy. Politicians are way too busy now kneeling in front of corporate American billionaires, lopping off a big chunk for themselves, to fiddle around giving the middle class a helping hand. Bottom line: they are so addicted to their greed they can’t see the bright flashing light bulb going off that asks, ‘you know what you make people into that make good wages? You make them into customers’. Then everybody is happy. Both sides used to understand that concept.
Funny how these lying bottom feeding political personalities that can’t function in a normal career are living in multimillion-dollar homes, have vacation properties and garages packed with luxury automobiles when their wages are only $100k or so per year. Modern elections cost millions and millions of dollars, so you’re going to spend those millions for a job that pays $100-200k? Seriously? How’s that make sense unless you’re getting a cash injection under the table somewhere? Stop this nonsense and Congressional stupidity will fall by 75%. I’ve made $100k per year a few times over the years, and I was living a pretty pedestrian existence.
It scares me to think that this situation isn’t going to change anytime soon, certainly not until the country has a viable and electable third party to upset the status quo, but where are these leaders to be harvested? Playing Grand Theft Auto? Tweeting cleavage selfies on Twitter? Posting the design on your Starbucks latte to your 650 virtual ‘friends’ whom you’ve never met? I think I might understand how they feel when the self-absorbed look up from their devices and take stock of current American politics…like me they probably get sick to their stomachs and go right back to watching cat videos on YouTube. How do we re-engage young people who don’t understand they will inherit this mess? The clock is ticking.
Somehow, someway, the American people have to imprint on politicians that they have to stop their obsessive/compulsive need to be ‘right’ because that ends debate on a subject immediately. We didn’t send them to Washington carrying tablets of stone written with their personal agenda of greed. We sent them there with paper and pencil with a BIG eraser to try and try again in an attempt to find solutions for the majority of us.
They have worlds of information at their feet that shows the positive historical accomplishments we’ve made as a negotiating and compromising nation…but they are going to have to end the myopic focus that is prevalent in today’s politicians and re-learn the value of Big Picture thinking. The left and right fringe elements are standing with gavels on the soapboxes of Congress now making policy, and I don’t like it. Its not good for us…probably closer to dangerous for us then we want to admit. Our forward progress depends on both sides moving back closer to the center. Quit shaking your finger at the other guy and get busy thinking of what you REALLY need to be happy.
Beyond pie-in-the sky—-
From the above article: “The Democrats of the present are a long way, in both time and ideology, from the Democrats I would feel most at home with.”
How true, Mr. Talbot!
The Democratic Party of my dreams would once again stand up for working people and the un- and underemployed.”
Not a chance, Mr. Talbot. Dreams vs. hard core reality.
From the post below another FDR quote and more reality. i.e. a history lesson for Mr. Talbott, citizen -voters and our appointed and elected officials to seriously contemplate about our present economic reality….
“Down the Plughole”
“40 years of Economic Policy in One Chart”
Is America in the throes of a class war?
It all began in the 1970s, that’s when everything started going down the plughole. Once wages detached from productivity, the rich progressively got richer. They used their wealth to reduce taxes on capital, role back critical regulations, break up the unions, install their own lapdog politicians, push through trade agreements that pitted US workers against low-paid labor in the developing world, and induce their shady Central Bank buddies to keep interest rates locked below the rate of inflation so they could cream hefty profits off gigantic asset bubbles. Now, 40 years later, they own the whole f*cking shooting match, lock, stock and barrel. And it’s all because management decided to take the lion’s share of productivity gains which threw the whole system off-kilter undermining the basic pillars of democratic government. Here’s how FDR summed it up:
“The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism—ownership of Government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.” (Franklin D. Roosevelt: “Message to Congress on Curbing Monopolies.,” April 29, 1938. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project.
Are we there yet?
“When was the last time you heard Obama talk about “improving labor standards” or “collective bargaining”?
“Don’t make me laugh. It’s not even on his radar. Did you know that inequality has actually gotten worse under Obama? Much worse.”
More reality below, if you can handle the truth?
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/01/15/40-years-of-economic-policy-in-one-chart/
Instead of being a comment to Matt’s piece, Dennis’ 750 (or so) word comment was worthy of being a stand alone column on it’s own merit.
Matt you have put yourself in the company of Senator Elizabeth Warren and former and now deceased Senator from Pa. He jumbed twice, look what it got him from the Dems. Nothing but a stab in the back. The same is now starting to happen to Senator Warren as she steps out of her comfort zone of the NE.Also jumbing Jim another NE Senator who went to the Dems. He also got stabed in the back.When changing as a politician you change for political gain not ideals. The party you move to will take your vote but will never trust you again. Just ask Joe Leiberman. I assume Matt your ideals were alway very Liberal and you may have been very vague about ideals and politics. I do resent your comment that there are some Republicans that are fine upstanding citizens. I assume you think that the other Republicans are not. Matt you are a very confused person that is trying to develope your political ideals ,into a weekly article. Thats fine but you have only a very limited idea of what politics are all about. So you take the easy way out. Be a very left leaning phony Democrat in an area where you could have some followers. You know Matt attack the Conservatives. That will sell well in Benicia. I call that a very weak solution just to get a few local followers. You know how that goes Matt. He is such a caring person. I guess as you describe Republicans you were not always that way. As you said you were one of them.Just switch to a Democrat and they will love me. Not always that way Matt.. I find your articles not at all sincere. Just an attempt to gather some readers with ideals that some might say are for readership gain. There are some commentors that will disagree with my comment. In most cases I do respect their political beliefs. They have been very consistsant and at times not so nice to the Conservative commentors. I do expect that. Matt have you really figured out just politically who you are. Are your ideals sincere?
Excellent column, Matt; excellent response from Dennis – I agree it should be a separate column!
Never mind the nothingburger from the learning disabled fool above. Great column as always Matt.
H H just as I expected. Right on Q. Again you show your lack of political knowledge. Just a pure follower H H.
Right on what?
Hi just wanted to give you a brief heads up and let you know a few of the pictures aren’t loading properly. I’m not sure why but I think its a linking issue. I’ve tried it in two different web browsers and both show the same results.|